I expect that many of you would be comparing the launching the marketing messages behind the Moto X and the Lumia line. I would like to receive some enlightments on your opinions, while offering my views.
Back in 2011, with the Lumia 800, Nokia brought back colour to the smartphone race, with 5 bright colours on offer. The media: colour is great, but wheres the power? With the Nokia Lumia 900 in early 2012 + new complaints about poor photo results, the Media pretty much echoed that message. The Lumia 920 offered yellow to the latter, along with a large number of new innovations. The media played up the weight instead, and yet still comparing about the hardware, even though the software was evident in not needing it. The Lumia 925 offered a more sophisticated feel to the chinky Lumia line, yet the media now complained about the LACK of colour features and how its not new ENOUGH.
Enter Lumia 1020: It offered a revolutionary camera that redefined the meaning of phone photography. The media: People don't NEED great and revolutionarily detailed social media photos (*contradicting the complaints in the Lumia 900*).
Now, the Lumia line was advertised to be an inviting feel with warm surface of the polycarbonate greeting your hands instead of hard cold metal, with main complains being the screen not being 1080 p, lack of metal in design, and Windows Phone 8. The Moto X echoed shamelessly about colour being more important than specs (from Google/Android, that's amazingly amusing), the lack of an quad-core and 1080 p screen was not being screamed from the rooftops, and the 10mp camera was hailed by Pocketnow as a new imaging innovation (WTF).
So, what do the folks here say about the Moto X's marketing messages and its seemly Cut/Paste adoption from the Lumia line launches?
Back in 2011, with the Lumia 800, Nokia brought back colour to the smartphone race, with 5 bright colours on offer. The media: colour is great, but wheres the power? With the Nokia Lumia 900 in early 2012 + new complaints about poor photo results, the Media pretty much echoed that message. The Lumia 920 offered yellow to the latter, along with a large number of new innovations. The media played up the weight instead, and yet still comparing about the hardware, even though the software was evident in not needing it. The Lumia 925 offered a more sophisticated feel to the chinky Lumia line, yet the media now complained about the LACK of colour features and how its not new ENOUGH.
Enter Lumia 1020: It offered a revolutionary camera that redefined the meaning of phone photography. The media: People don't NEED great and revolutionarily detailed social media photos (*contradicting the complaints in the Lumia 900*).
Now, the Lumia line was advertised to be an inviting feel with warm surface of the polycarbonate greeting your hands instead of hard cold metal, with main complains being the screen not being 1080 p, lack of metal in design, and Windows Phone 8. The Moto X echoed shamelessly about colour being more important than specs (from Google/Android, that's amazingly amusing), the lack of an quad-core and 1080 p screen was not being screamed from the rooftops, and the 10mp camera was hailed by Pocketnow as a new imaging innovation (WTF).
So, what do the folks here say about the Moto X's marketing messages and its seemly Cut/Paste adoption from the Lumia line launches?
rly: Pretty
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram